I make my tiles in 3D. That dotted line is where the edge of the tile is. You can see that my isometric tile goes outside the edge a bit. When I render, that extra padding helps when tiling.
A similar principle could work for you. Make the tile slightly larger than you expect, then do 1-px crop at the end.
I've been working on Flare since about November '09.
Gameplay/engine code is fun to write. I enjoy it more than scripting an actual game, and more than playing a game. This might be some kind of insanity.
I enjoy the act of creating. It gives me the illusion of an existential purpose. Life is terribly short! Each game developer only has enough time to create maybe 5 substantial games. Your entire life's work might be your favorite 5 game ideas. It's overwhelming just to type that out.
I take pride in my work. I like showing it to others and getting positive feedback.
Just like Roots, sometimes I'm doing mundane code at work and I crave something more challenging. I get less productive on my game project when things are more busy/fun at the office.
Having my project free/open has become a motivation in itself. People are excited about it, and I want to meet their expectations. This can be exhausting.
I think we should involve sister communities in the challenges if possible, e.g. freegamedev, blendswap. Talk to the admins of those places and see if a shared weekly challenge would be welcome. Cross-promote the challenges on all participating sites (again, only if there's real buy-in from the heads of those communities, otherwise it's just spam). In turn, what recurring events do they have that we can be a part of? This cross-promotion could bring in more participants and excitement, and maybe even friendly rivalries between communities.
Do more art sprints as weekly challenges. Communicate with game projects to schedule art sprints. Get feedback from the projects to find out what helped and what didn't, e.g. "we got too many untextured models". Use that info to improve future sprints. Don't be afraid to do a follow-up sprint to finish what was started (e.g. "sprint part 2, add textures to these models, this other one needs animations").
Do a weekly challenge that encourages site-wide collaboration. E.g: this week we'll make all the art necessary for an 8-bit rogue-like, all in a unified style. Work with an artist before-hand to set up the standards for this set, e.g. choose the pixel art color palette, make a couple example sprites/tiles, make a list of all the art needed to complete the set. Decide ahead-of-time on a unified license e.g. this will all be CC-BY. At the end we collect all the individual pieces and upload a unified set, ready to build an entire game. (or several sets... e.g. "OGA roguelike tile set", "OGA roguelike enemy set", "OGA roguelike items", "OGA roguelike sound effects", "OGA roguelike music"). Experienced artists should actively help critique entries during the week so that they all reach the unified style by the end.
Bend the "Week" part when needed. Do double, triple, quad-week challenges when the goal is worth it.
Apologies to Blarumyrran and Johndh for being my lab rats there. I usually don't give uninvited criticism.
From here on, I'm happy to help critique anyone's art if specifically requested. I'm not a great critic so feel free to use or ignore what I say.
At one point we talked about OGA having an option to encourage critiques. E.g. when a user submits new art they can click a checkbox that says "please critique this". Maybe we'll revisit that when OGA2 is in full swing.
I think you need a couple critics working together. Maybe a technical critic ("this model needs a spec map, fix it") and an aesthetic critic ("this monster doesn't look scary at all.").
I think a good one-size-fits-all bestiary might not need a distinct overall art direction, but it should have a strong set of core guidelines/principles.
For example, with Flare I don't have a strong art direction but I want to make sure each creature feels unique on looks alone. Because I don't have a lot of room for detail, I pour most of the personality of creatures into the way they move. If my goblins were just small green humanoids they'd be instantly forgettable. Instead I made them hop around, floppy ears, etc. to give the sense that they're curious and fey. You can also see where I fall short with the Skeleton -- his walk animation is too upright and stiff and has no personality; yes, even undead should ooze personality.
Some example aesthetic principles:
A humanoid creature should never just be a human body with an animal head attached, or a human with different color skin.
Tell a story with the creature's clothes or adornments.
The creature's stance and way of moving should allude to the personality, and maybe toughness, of the creature.
The creature should have a unique silhouette not shared with other creatures.
Some example technical principles:
Use quads as much as possible.
Use an extra edge-loop around joints (e.g. elbows, knees).
Keep subdivision modeling in mind: respect edge loop flow that would work in a higher-poly model.
If it helps the model, sculpt a high-res version and bake a normal map
Make sure the mesh and armature scale/rotation are cleared/applied before doing animations
Avoid features that can't be used in most 3D engines (e.g. particle fur)
Perhaps use a common rig for humanoid creatures
Now, I'm going to critique the monsters posted in this thread on aesthetics; just to give you an example of what is needed to build a usable bestiary.
1. Blarumyrran's Ogre
I love the art direction, it definitely feels unique. I would make up a new creature name for it ("Ogre" invokes too many fantasy standards, and it would be better for this to be a new creature). It probably wouldn't work as an enemy; the proportions (large upper body, very small lower body) gives the sense that it is a harmless, maybe misunderstood creature. If you want it to be menacing instead, try normalizing the proportions a bit and maybe do something unique with his posture.
2. Johndh's Orc
At the size rendered for Flare it just looks like a human with green skin. That makes it an unexciting enemy option. Maybe having its own animations would help. Also consider a thematic way for all orcs to dress (e.g. tribal, or blackened iron, or skulls of their enemies) to give orcs a visual distinction and race story.
3. Johndh's Werebear
Too much "teddy-bear" and not enough "godless killing machine". Maybe he should gallop on all fours instead of walking upright. Maybe he needs shredded clothes so that the Were- part is more obvious. I might change his proportions and head shape so it looks more like a sentient Kodiak (look bulkier and furrier).
4. Jondh's Spider
Generic but that's okay -- plenty of games will need a basic spider. I would probably suggest different variations that look more intimidating. Make one that has thick hairy tarantula-style legs. Maybe one that is more fantasy, with glowing markings and glands. Maybe one that has is covered in spikes/horns/blades, evolved in a dangerous forest. Or maybe combine those options to make a truly terrifying spider, one that fits as a real enemy in more games.
Flare isn't a great target for this because Flare uses tiny 2D renders. Flare creatures don't have to worry about poly count, UV mapping, textures, good rigging, etc. That's setting the bar pretty low. The end result could look passable in Flare but might be unusable crap in a 3D game.
In fact, none of Flare's current creatures would look decent in e.g. a first-person view 3D game. I've taken a lot of shortcuts with my creatures because I only need about 20x60 pixels worth of info.
I still think a unified bestiary project could be a good idea if you push for high technical quality.
Even if you achieve that technical quality, you are running against the bigger issue: lack of aesthetic art direction. It might be easy to build a large collection of very bland/generic 3D models, but they probably won't get used in games that care about aesthetics.
Or, OGA could build a bestiary with an art direction. That eliminates plenty of games that use a different style. If the bestiary was good enough it could influence games to go with that style. But this is hard work and requires strong criticism, and the end result might not be used as much as a generic bestiary.
I plan to contribute here, especially as I want to greatly grow Flare's bestiary.
I also intend to step up my game a bit with my next monsters. I want to make sure my models are good enough to drop right into a 3D game.
Anyone work extensively with using 3D creatures in games? It would be nice to have various guidelines and best practices. E.g. avoid feature X because it doesn't export to most formats, or make sure the model is oriented a certain way.
I basically make my tiles slightly bigger so that the alpha transparency edge is covered when tiling.
http://clintbellanger.net/rpg/tutorials/isometric_tiles/10_camera_after.png
I make my tiles in 3D. That dotted line is where the edge of the tile is. You can see that my isometric tile goes outside the edge a bit. When I render, that extra padding helps when tiling.
A similar principle could work for you. Make the tile slightly larger than you expect, then do 1-px crop at the end.
I'd prefer using OpenGL abstracted. I think SDL 1.3 is supposed to have 2D blitting wrapped around OpenGL. Maybe SFML does the same?
Either way I'm not going to make the switch yet. The game is enjoyable as is.
Most likely scenario: when I decide the game absolutely must have dynamic lighting, I'll have to move to OpenGL then.
The books are very impressive
I've been working on Flare since about November '09.
Gameplay/engine code is fun to write. I enjoy it more than scripting an actual game, and more than playing a game. This might be some kind of insanity.
I enjoy the act of creating. It gives me the illusion of an existential purpose. Life is terribly short! Each game developer only has enough time to create maybe 5 substantial games. Your entire life's work might be your favorite 5 game ideas. It's overwhelming just to type that out.
I take pride in my work. I like showing it to others and getting positive feedback.
Just like Roots, sometimes I'm doing mundane code at work and I crave something more challenging. I get less productive on my game project when things are more busy/fun at the office.
Having my project free/open has become a motivation in itself. People are excited about it, and I want to meet their expectations. This can be exhausting.
I think we should involve sister communities in the challenges if possible, e.g. freegamedev, blendswap. Talk to the admins of those places and see if a shared weekly challenge would be welcome. Cross-promote the challenges on all participating sites (again, only if there's real buy-in from the heads of those communities, otherwise it's just spam). In turn, what recurring events do they have that we can be a part of? This cross-promotion could bring in more participants and excitement, and maybe even friendly rivalries between communities.
Do more art sprints as weekly challenges. Communicate with game projects to schedule art sprints. Get feedback from the projects to find out what helped and what didn't, e.g. "we got too many untextured models". Use that info to improve future sprints. Don't be afraid to do a follow-up sprint to finish what was started (e.g. "sprint part 2, add textures to these models, this other one needs animations").
Do a weekly challenge that encourages site-wide collaboration. E.g: this week we'll make all the art necessary for an 8-bit rogue-like, all in a unified style. Work with an artist before-hand to set up the standards for this set, e.g. choose the pixel art color palette, make a couple example sprites/tiles, make a list of all the art needed to complete the set. Decide ahead-of-time on a unified license e.g. this will all be CC-BY. At the end we collect all the individual pieces and upload a unified set, ready to build an entire game. (or several sets... e.g. "OGA roguelike tile set", "OGA roguelike enemy set", "OGA roguelike items", "OGA roguelike sound effects", "OGA roguelike music"). Experienced artists should actively help critique entries during the week so that they all reach the unified style by the end.
Bend the "Week" part when needed. Do double, triple, quad-week challenges when the goal is worth it.
Apologies to Blarumyrran and Johndh for being my lab rats there. I usually don't give uninvited criticism.
From here on, I'm happy to help critique anyone's art if specifically requested. I'm not a great critic so feel free to use or ignore what I say.
At one point we talked about OGA having an option to encourage critiques. E.g. when a user submits new art they can click a checkbox that says "please critique this". Maybe we'll revisit that when OGA2 is in full swing.
I think you need a couple critics working together. Maybe a technical critic ("this model needs a spec map, fix it") and an aesthetic critic ("this monster doesn't look scary at all.").
I think a good one-size-fits-all bestiary might not need a distinct overall art direction, but it should have a strong set of core guidelines/principles.
For example, with Flare I don't have a strong art direction but I want to make sure each creature feels unique on looks alone. Because I don't have a lot of room for detail, I pour most of the personality of creatures into the way they move. If my goblins were just small green humanoids they'd be instantly forgettable. Instead I made them hop around, floppy ears, etc. to give the sense that they're curious and fey. You can also see where I fall short with the Skeleton -- his walk animation is too upright and stiff and has no personality; yes, even undead should ooze personality.
Some example aesthetic principles:
Some example technical principles:
Now, I'm going to critique the monsters posted in this thread on aesthetics; just to give you an example of what is needed to build a usable bestiary.
1. Blarumyrran's Ogre
I love the art direction, it definitely feels unique. I would make up a new creature name for it ("Ogre" invokes too many fantasy standards, and it would be better for this to be a new creature). It probably wouldn't work as an enemy; the proportions (large upper body, very small lower body) gives the sense that it is a harmless, maybe misunderstood creature. If you want it to be menacing instead, try normalizing the proportions a bit and maybe do something unique with his posture.
2. Johndh's Orc
At the size rendered for Flare it just looks like a human with green skin. That makes it an unexciting enemy option. Maybe having its own animations would help. Also consider a thematic way for all orcs to dress (e.g. tribal, or blackened iron, or skulls of their enemies) to give orcs a visual distinction and race story.
3. Johndh's Werebear
Too much "teddy-bear" and not enough "godless killing machine". Maybe he should gallop on all fours instead of walking upright. Maybe he needs shredded clothes so that the Were- part is more obvious. I might change his proportions and head shape so it looks more like a sentient Kodiak (look bulkier and furrier).
4. Jondh's Spider
Generic but that's okay -- plenty of games will need a basic spider. I would probably suggest different variations that look more intimidating. Make one that has thick hairy tarantula-style legs. Maybe one that is more fantasy, with glowing markings and glands. Maybe one that has is covered in spikes/horns/blades, evolved in a dangerous forest. Or maybe combine those options to make a truly terrifying spider, one that fits as a real enemy in more games.
Flare isn't a great target for this because Flare uses tiny 2D renders. Flare creatures don't have to worry about poly count, UV mapping, textures, good rigging, etc. That's setting the bar pretty low. The end result could look passable in Flare but might be unusable crap in a 3D game.
In fact, none of Flare's current creatures would look decent in e.g. a first-person view 3D game. I've taken a lot of shortcuts with my creatures because I only need about 20x60 pixels worth of info.
I still think a unified bestiary project could be a good idea if you push for high technical quality.
Even if you achieve that technical quality, you are running against the bigger issue: lack of aesthetic art direction. It might be easy to build a large collection of very bland/generic 3D models, but they probably won't get used in games that care about aesthetics.
Or, OGA could build a bestiary with an art direction. That eliminates plenty of games that use a different style. If the bestiary was good enough it could influence games to go with that style. But this is hard work and requires strong criticism, and the end result might not be used as much as a generic bestiary.
johndh: yes! Can't wait to try these out in-game.
I plan to contribute here, especially as I want to greatly grow Flare's bestiary.
I also intend to step up my game a bit with my next monsters. I want to make sure my models are good enough to drop right into a 3D game.
Anyone work extensively with using 3D creatures in games? It would be nice to have various guidelines and best practices. E.g. avoid feature X because it doesn't export to most formats, or make sure the model is oriented a certain way.
Pages